After spending a few weeks with the CS2.4, I start to
notice a possible sound signature or if I am a bit
overly critical, a possible weakness given the design.
As with most Thiel speakers, the mid range driver is
smaller than the average mid of other manufacturers.
I was not part of the design process but I think the
main reason for using small mid driver has to do with
time-phase coherent.
We Americans have a say "There is no substitute for
cubic in." In speaker design, I guess the equivalent
would be "There is no substitute for membrane area."
When a small mid driver is used, one has to cross
over to the bass at a rather high frequency so the
bass driver can help out the mid when playing loud.
In the case of the CS2.4, I believe I've read that
the cross over freq. to the bass is around 1KHz.
But still ultimately the laws of physics come into
play and being a small mid the advantage is faster
transient speed and better clarity which is the
hall mark of the CS2.4. On the down side though,
at high volume, the sound can be a bit strained as
the mid does not have enough membrane area to pressure
the air at low frequencies.
With the CS2.4, especially with saxophone, the "blah"
produced lacks a bit of weight and at high volume,
the depends on the recording, the vocal can sound
a bit shrill especially if your electronics are sort
of in that direction. When you hear people complain about
the sound of Thiel speakers in general, I think this
is what they talk about. If you're used to speakers
which use larger mid driver (for example the Wilson
uses 6in and even 7in mid) that have a more relax and
warm mid range, you probably think the Thiel house
sound a bit on the bright side.
Anyway, I guess you cannot have it all. surprised :-)